The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 68 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments.
Abstract
The goals of both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis are described and procedural guidelines for each approach are summarized, emphasizing the use of factor analysis in developing and refining clinical measures. For exploratory factor analysis, a rationale is presented for selecting between principal components analysis and common factor analysis depending on whether the research goal involves either identification of latent constructs or data reduction. Confirmatory factor analysis using structural equation modeling is described for use in validating the dimensional structure of a measure. Additionally, the uses of confirmatory factor analysis for assessing the invariance of measures across samples and for evaluating multitrait-multimethod data are also briefly described. Suggestions are offered for handling common problems with item-level data, and examples illustrating potential difficulties with confirming dimensional structures from initial exploratory analyses are reviewed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Also specifying models cautiously and dropping estimation of extraneous parameters is also an option”
From Applied Psychometrics: Sample Size and Sample Power Considerations in Factor Analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in General (2018) · cites this paper as Floyd & Widaman, 1995
In the citing paper
“According to this rule, data collection process was initiated with the aim of reaching at least 150 patients, which is five times of 30 questions.”
From Turkish Translation of the Patterns of Activity Measure-Pain in Patients with Chronic Low Back and Neck Pain: Validity and Reliability. (2022) · cites this paper as Floyd & Widaman, 1995
In the citing paper
“This procedure is routinely adopted, reduces measurement error, creates more accurate SEM models, and allows for greater confidence in the resulting analyses [65–68].”
From A structural equation model of the relationship between insomnia, negative affect, and paranoid thinking (2017) · cites this paper as [67]
Citations
Cites
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005 · Cited by 27,200
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 20,015
Structural Equations with Latent Variables.
Clogg, C. C., & Bollen, K. A. (1991) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2072165 · Cited by 17,475
EQS : structural equations program manual
Bentler, P. M. (1989) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 9,669
Testing Structural Equation Models.
Clogg, C. C., Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1995) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2580595 · Cited by 8,246
A Reliability Coefficient for Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291170 · Cited by 7,330
Measuring Dyadic Adjustment: New Scales for Assessing the Quality of Marriage and Similar Dyads
Spanier, G. B. (1976) · Journal of Marriage and the Family · doi:10.2307/350547 · Cited by 7,095
Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.
Tufte, E. R., Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1979) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2286442 · Cited by 5,214
Harman, H. H. (1960) · Cited by 5,148
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A. W. M., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012 · Cited by 10,764
Gratz, K. L., & Roemer, L. (2004) · Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment · doi:10.1023/b:joba.0000007455.08539.94 · Cited by 8,942
Using Self-Report Assessment Methods to Explore Facets of Mindfulness
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191105283504 · Cited by 7,511
Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309 · Cited by 6,567
Varni, J. W., Seid, M., & Kurtin, P. S. (2001) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-200108000-00006 · Cited by 5,131
Metadata
- Authors
- Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- ORCID
- Widaman, Keith F.
- Venue
- Psychological Assessment
- Published
- 1995-09
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 286-299
- ISSN
- 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-134X
- OpenAlex
- W2039173306
- Cited by
- 3,970
- References
- 68
- Citations by year
- 2026: 97 · 2025: 164 · 2024: 184 · 2023: 168 · 2022: 193 · 2021: 179 · 2020: 173 · 2019: 166 · 2018: 192 · 2017: 208 · 2016: 180 · 2015: 194 · 2014: 203 · 2013: 201 · 2012: 189
- FWCI
- 31.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
- Keywords
- factor analysis, clinical assessment tools, instrument development, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, principal component analysis, common factor analysis, structural equation modeling, dimensional structure, measurement invariance, latent constructs
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
